Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Greenways [greenway map of Ireland in post 1]

Options
19192949697120

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,707 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Most of the links you have provided dont appear to be actual Greenways. One appears to be a purpose built pedestrian/cyclist shared space, the others seem to just be existing spaces where a sign with a bike symbol was put up. How do you propose to imporve the one at Glounthaune?

    Here is the Part 8 proposals for Glanmire to City Cycle Route (Phase 1), do you have a particular problem with these?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,066 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl



    No I think the Glanmire one is absolutely excellent: that's literally the design I would prefer to see implemented. I think we're perhaps on the same page now. I'd prefer to see that design implemented in Glounthaune for instance. It would be exactly what I would have suggested for Glounthaune.

    The Carrigaline, Glanmire, Glounthaune schemes are all "greenways". If you follow them, they'll revert to wider sections of what you'll consider a "true" greenway after a distance. The Glanmire and Glounthaune ones are the newer variety (tar, 4m wide) but they'll narrow to 3m wide footpath type setups and look like footpaths also in places.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,398 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Glanmire literally calls itself a "cycle route" in the plans so who is saying it's a greenway ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,066 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    It's a roadside "greenway" design leading into the "cycle route" from two sides. In fairness, you can't be expected to know that historical or local context. But it's the newest "middle" section between two greenway sections. And I think it's really good.

    I think these suburban "roadside routes" should be designed like that. It seems more appropriate for suburban or primary commuter routes than the shared greenway design. There's some predictability about what each end user will likely do.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,922 ✭✭✭cantalach


    That proposed route which fully separates cyclists and pedestrians is much better than the shared path through Glounthane.

    Almost a side point, but what’s interesting is that it is being developed independently of the project to provide cycle and walking infrastructure alongside the Tivoli dual carriageway. And the timeline of that second project is likely to be linked to the Tivoli docks redevelopment. So we could end up with a lovely cycle route down through Glanmire and then a dodgy ride along a 100kph dual carriageway with no shoulders towards the city. It’s a lack of joined up thinking, literally in this instance.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 232 ✭✭Heartbreak Hank


    I would have one criticism in that it looks, to me at least, like the "segregation" is wholly down to line markings. This is possibly intentional as the 2.75m width is very narrow for a two way so they may be looking for cyclists to "spill over" into the footpath when passing etc.

    There doesn't look to be a level or material difference between the "cycle track" and the "footpath". Although I am 100% in favour of segregation, I would prefer in this situation if it was a shared path of 4.75 m. The narrowness of the two way and the lack of a physical way of showing where cycle track ends and footpath begins will lead to confusion over who has priority IMO. In a shared path the cyclist is in a pedestrian zone and there is a clear hierarchy.

    How would someone with a visual impairment know they were in the cycle track?



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,398 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Never mind visual impairment pedestrians who are well able to see can't figure out it's segregated unless you put it on a different level.

    Ive tried a bell, asking and just sauntering behind people and I still get screamed at by dog walkers and power walking Karens with their backs to the traffic.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,066 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    It's not clear from the drawings, but there's apparently kerb and colour separation between the cycle and pedestrian parts. The proposed road view 02 seems to show this.

    I know I'd always love more width but in fairness to them 2.75 is adhering to the standards. In the "Proposed Road and Seating Area" it seems to show that the cycle track is "down" from the footpath section. The devil is in the detail and of course you're both right, but I think/hope it looks correct.


    Edit: looking at the legend it appears to be a 125mm kerb.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,532 ✭✭✭veryangryman


    Is there any known next phase of the Dublin-Galway Greenway once it crosses the Shannon. Like where does it end or are they big-banging the thing all the way to Shannonbridge or wherever. The local area west of the town could make good use of it for a safe commute. Really crappy access to the town for cyclists, especially coming from west side and meeting the one way at the wrong side upon arrival



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Route 5 was selected which shows the greenway going south once it crosses the river. Few details on the specifics though




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 24,398 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Am I right in thinking it will also link to a Greenway coming up the Shannon from Limerick at some stage too ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,393 ✭✭✭Grassey


    You'd hope so...


    There is some movement at the moment to link ballina to dromineer


    So some of the way to Portumna on the Tipperary side

    And on the other side Limerick to Scarrif


    From a quick look I couldn't see anything definitive to link from either of those end points to the Galway route.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,066 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    Sorry for resurrecting the now-finished conversation but another cyclist was knocked down on this greenway this morning.

    Others here might be happy to stick with cycling on the greenway, but I'll be staying off it myself until they deal with some more of the conflicts.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,398 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Knocked down how ?

    If it's by a car pulling out of a side road then it's not the cycle lanes fault and if that is your fear then you can not cycle on any road either.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,066 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    There's no explicit direction on who should yield. The greenway is very slightly elevated from the road and driveways. In my experience, pedestrians typically yield to motorists crossing the greenway, even though they should not need to. Cyclists typically continue on, as I believe they are entitled to.

    Construction teams have drawn "sharks teeth" triangles on the ground for motorists. I'm not sure these have any basis in law. I believe these are more to warn motorists about the slightly different gradient. Worse, at the point in question, the whole interface between greenway and crossing traffic is red (what does red mean?).

    So motorists will make bad decisions because of both vacuum of explicit direction and also because of the conflict of lived-feedback: "pedestrian greenway users yield to cars", "cycling greenway users don't yield to cars".

    On the road, by contrast, I take the lane. There's much less chance of a motorist thinking I'm going to yield to them "just because".



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,066 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    I believe today's incident was (again) a motorist crossing to/from the shop believing that the greenway user would automatically yield.

    I believe they hit the cyclist's rear wheel.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,398 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    The person making the turn should most definitely yield to the person on the direct route.

    If it was a car coming the other way there would be no need for "specific direction"

    More victim blaming from you.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,066 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    Who was making a turn? The motorist may have been going straight on. The cyclist may have been turning. We have no idea.

    It's not victim blaming, it's trying to prevent the next collision. Did you make any submission on the Part 8 yourself?



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,398 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    I believe today's incident was (again) a motorist crossing to/from the shop believing that the greenway user would automatically yield.


    Thats you five minutes ago.

    If a car driver hit a cyclist on the cycle path they must have been crossing it and therefore should have yielded to the main flow of traffic.

    I actually don't believe you do cycle and are just another troll who stealth attacks new infrastructure so I wont be replying to you again.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,066 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    Feel free to go through my posting history. To be upfront with you, I actively campaign for cycle infrastructure (and sometimes pedestrian infrastructure). I spend quite a bit of my free time reviewing and making formal submissions in that capacity. I've cycled more kilometres than I've driven this year. I had written quite a bit more and deleted it: please let's put this US/THEM thing to bed.

    So I'd say I'm reasonably invested in improving cycle infrastructure, let's say. Just because I believe the infrastructure is poorly designed and encourages people to make mistakes, doesn't mean I agree with their mistakes. If we want better infrastructure, we must also discuss what's bad about existing infrastructure.

    My position since three pages now has been that greenway end users will be unpredictable. This is OK. This is also explicitly detailed in the National Cycle Manual section 1.9.1. Unpredictability becomes dangerous when any kind of speed gets added to the mix. My position throughout has been that there needs to be structure around urban roadside greenways like this one, and that while very good leisure facilities, they're not a good design for transport infrastructure.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,107 ✭✭✭mr spuckler


    The bridge in Athlone is being lifted into place this week, would be really interesting to watch it in progress. I'll stroll up for a look when I'm down next in 2 or 3 weeks time.

    https://www.westmeathindependent.ie/2022/08/18/river-restrictions-ahead-in-athlone-due-to-cycleway-bridge-construction/



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,922 ✭✭✭cantalach


    That last paragraph is about as wide of the mark as you could possibly be. hans aus dtschl has been posting about cycling-related issues in the Cork area for years. It would be obvious to anyone familiar with his “work” that he cares deeply about life on two wheels. I don’t know the guy outside of boards.ie but you are very wrong with your assessment.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,066 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    Yeah look the whole urban roadside greenway thing is dragging us off-topic again I think and for that I apologise.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,293 ✭✭✭pigtown


    Apart from the Dublin-Galway route, are there any other nationally significant routes proposed? Most others seem to be local councils acting independently of each other



  • Registered Users Posts: 168 ✭✭9320


    Grand Canal should be completed in a few years, could link in with Barrow "Blueway" and if the rest of that is revisited could eventually link up with Waterford - New Ross. Royal Canal should be completed into the Liffey by 2025/6.

    Limerick to Tralee would be a decent stretch, that should/could be completed by 2026/7.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,807 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    Ulster Canal Greenway should run largely along the existing canal from Lough Neagh to Lough Erne. Big project split across multiple counties. Some sections around Monaghan town have been finished for a long time.

    Also a cross-border greenway between Derry and Donegal (Derry council have approved, no surprises the Donegal side have delayed multiple times and are years behind schedule)



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,707 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Well the Dublin-Galway project is really Athlone-Galway as a good chunk of Dublin-Galway has already been delivered through the excellent work of Westmeath CoCo. The remainder east of Westmeath is also in various stages of delivery by the relevant local authorities.

    In addition to those mentioned, there should be a significant route delivered as part of the N/M20 project.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,852 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    Royal Canal between Clonsilla and Maynooth is a disgrace. 😤



  • Registered Users Posts: 168 ✭✭9320


    could you google maps link to site of incident?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,066 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    I was told it was at 51.91176845270551, -8.331337290297677 but the Google maps image for it will be outdated. It's where the greenway passes Fitzpatrick's foodstore. Again, not sure whether the cyclist was going straight or turning. Not sure whether the car was going straight or turning. I was just told that the cyclist was on the greenway.



Advertisement