Killiney Towers Roundabout is being made narrower!

patrickbrophy18

In the last few days, I have noticed yellow road markings on the roundabout in front of Killiney Towers which indicate that is going to be made narrower. I don't understand why this is the case. It is mind-bogglingly annoying that in the last two years, the Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council have implemented such idiotic measures. The other measures carried out where as follows:

1. The replacement of the roundabout at Mountown Avenue and Kill Lane with a traffic light arrangement which has effectively made the through-flow of traffic much slower. The 46A rerouting was supposed to make the route more attractive. The new traffic light arrangement does defeat the purpose of this slightly.
2. The narrowing of the roundabout at Stradbrook making for a much tighter situation for buses.
3. The building out of curbs at Marine Road parallel to The Pavilion which has again, made the road more unsuitable for buses. As with point 2 above, these roads are heavily used by buses.
4. The installation of a mini roundabout at the junction of Saval Park Road, Dalkey Avenue and Burton Road (entrance to Killiney Hill Car Park) where the entrance to Saval Park Road has been made narrower. There are 29 Aircoaches that have to negotiate their way around this from Saval Park Road which appears to be a bit of a struggle. This is with the shorter 12 Meter Setra Coaches.
5. There are other areas where there have been curb build-outs implemented.

Are the Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council trying to make bus use and other large-vehicular traffic less attractive in the area?:eek:

They don't seem to realize that they are dis-improving the infrastructure in these areas when, in fact, they should be doing the very opposite! It irritates the life out of me that tax payers money is being squandered on quite significant down-grades to the infrastructure. Building out curbs and other similar infrastructure works actually makes the roads more dangerous for vehicles in general. The further apart vehicles are when traveling in opposite direction the safer they will be. Currently, it is becoming a more claustrophobic road network.:mad:

Seaswimmer

As annoying as it is for bus drivers, it improves things for pedestrians and cyclists. I presume DLRCC see these measures as traffic calming. I am familiar with the Mountown roundabout that was and while it undeniably contributed to smooth traffic flow, it was a nightmare as a pedestrian or cyclist. The general thrust in all urban areas is now to slow down traffic. By international standards our speed limits are still high in built up areas and given that these are routinely exceeded then maybe traffic calming is the way to go..

crushproof

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

1. The replacement of the roundabout at Mountown Avenue and Kill Lane with a traffic light arrangement which has effectively made the through-flow of traffic much slower. The 46A rerouting was supposed to make the route more attractive. The new traffic light arrangement does defeat the purpose of this slightly.
2. The narrowing of the roundabout at Stradbrook making for a much tighter situation for buses.
3. The building out of curbs at Marine Road parallel to The Pavilion which has again, made the road more unsuitable for buses. As with point 2 above, these roads are heavily used by buses.

In fairness the new improvements on Marine Road look fantastic and add alot to Dun Laoghaire town centre, alot better than having an overly wide road dominated by cars and buses. And I had a look today, the road is still rpetty wide and plenty of space for buses.
I despise Stradbrook squareabout but as was said, it does make it easier for cyclists to get around. In my opinion they should just some how either build traffic lights or a much smaller roundabout there, throw in a playground or whatever on the spare land that's left over.
I was on the 46A yesterday and the bus lanes around Kill Avenue have made a difference, I suppose at the end of the day traffic lights and proper car/bus/cycle lanes are much safer than a free for all roundabout in a busy suburb. Although I am bewildered when it comes to the 24hr bus lanes on Glenageary Rd Upper, all for the always empty No. 8 bus. They should be a bit pro active and put in road seperated cycle lanes instead.

patrickbrophy18

The Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council have recently built out the curb at the junction between St. Catherine's Road and Castlepark Road, another area served quite frequently by the 59 bus. Effectively, the front of the bus will now have to swing out to the other side of the road to enter at this junction. Is there no end to this nonsense?

Before, the bus was able to keep to it's side of the road the whole way around this corner. This is the way junctions should be where-ever a bus is 40 minutely or higher in frequency. Curb build outs should only be confined to neighborhoods that are Cul De Sacs or at least roads that are currently not served by buses.

Otherwise, you will have buses cutting corners on entering a road which is not supposed to happen. Furthermore, cutting corners is against the rules of the road. Now that the curb at the aforementioned junction has been built out, it will leave moderate sized vehicles no other choice but to cut the corner. At least, have an alternative measure (such as traffic lights) which keeps the road at the same width.

ted1

Cyclists are over accomdated for. I'd love to see how much money is spent per cyclist v any other road user bear in mind cyclists don't actual pay road tax or any tax if brought on cycle to work scheme

delta_bravo

ted1 wrote: »

Cyclists are over accomdated for. I'd love to see how much money is spent per cyclist v any other road user bear in mind cyclists don't actual pay road tax or any tax if brought on cycle to work scheme

Nobody pays road tax.

Motor vehicle owners (some of whom may also be cyclists) pay motor tax. Perhaps that's what you meant?

Fratton Fred

If DLRCC really wanted to help cyclists they would patch up a few more roads. You practically need a 4x4 to get along Church Road in Ballybrack these days.

nomdeboardie

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If DLRCC really wanted to help cyclists they would patch up a few more roads. You practically need a 4x4 to get along Church Road in Ballybrack these days.

+1 on road surfaces generally!

Cookie_Monster

I have to agree on the Farm roundabout replacement being stupid and some of the measures put in place around DL in recent time have been mind boggiling to say the least and downright dangerous to cyclists in place due to curbs moving out and so forth. The bottom of Marine road having the bus laybys removed makes no sense to me at all.

patrickbrophy18

I thought I would resurrect this thread given that the work's relating to it are currently taking place. I've seen the "progress:rolleyes::D" of this and it appears as though the cycle lanes have now been paved over by curb build outs. So much for making it safer for cyclists. Effectively, car users will now have to share the same lane with cyclists. I don't see how it is being made safer for pedestrians either as there was already ample sidewalk space for them. Unless the sidewalk is bursting at the seams which is far from the case, I don't see how extra sidewalk space is needed.

The 8 bus is already struggling to enter the Upper Glenageary Road Junction now that the entry radius has been significantly tightened. I was on the 59 bus today and the driver thinks that the works are ridiculous. I would love to ask the DLRCOCO why they are trying to fix something that isn't broken. The same thing goes for the Ballinclea/Killiney Road junction. Essentially, there will be less space and lanes for both junctions. How is reducing the amount of space between motorists and cyclists making the road safer? Would it not increase the likelihood of an accident?

nomdeboardie

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

I thought I would resurrect this thread given that the work's relating to it are currently taking place. I've seen the "progress:rolleyes::D" of this and it appears as though the cycle lanes have now been paved over by curb build outs. So much for making it safer for cyclists. Effectively, car users will now have to share the same lane with cyclists. I don't see how it is being made safer for pedestrians either as there was already ample sidewalk space for them. Unless the sidewalk is bursting at the seams which is far from the case, I don't see how extra sidewalk space is needed.

The 8 bus is already struggling to enter the Upper Glenageary Road Junction now that the entry radius has been significantly tightened. I was on the 59 bus today and the driver thinks that the works are ridiculous. I would love to ask the DLRCOCO why they are trying to fix something that isn't broken. The same thing goes for the Ballinclea/Killiney Road junction. Essentially, there will be less space and lanes for both junctions. How is reducing the amount of space between motorists and cyclists making the road safer? Would it not increase the likelihood of an accident?

Interesting - I've cycled through this a few times recently but hadn't worked out what's actually being done (too busy concentrating on staying alive, as always ). If it's being made into a single-lane roundabout, like the one at Stradbrook, then I actually prefer this, even when driving. Paradoxically, the narrower the lane and the tighter the junctions the better for cyclists, in that it should force them (us) to "take the lane", and prevent following traffic from cutting them off on exit. Of course if the geometry makes manouevering almost impossible for buses, then that's a problem!

Re Ballinclea/Killiney Road: Again, I've been through the roadworks here on a bike a couple of times recently too - didn't know what they were doing, and didn't think there was previously a problem there

Fratton Fred

They are doing something with the ramps on Avondale as well. Maybe they are planning on sending the main flow of traffic through there rather than Ballinclea road.

It all does seem like an incredible waste of money though, especially when the Glenageary roundabout just down the road is such a death trap.

helimachoptor

The new lights in the farm are a bit of a pain at peak but off-peak they change pretty quick i think.

patrickbrophy18

Fratton Fred wrote: »

They are doing something with the ramps on Avondale as well. Maybe they are planning on sending the main flow of traffic through there rather than Ballinclea road.

Good point actually! Out of the five roads branching off Killiney Towers Roundabout, Avondale Road probably has the most potential. It could easily be widened as well in due course (20-30 years:D) given that there is more than enough space for an extra lane on both sides. It appears as though smoother ramps are being installed to bring traffic back on to the road.

Cookie_Monster

Fratton Fred wrote: »

It all does seem like an incredible waste of money though, especially when the Glenageary roundabout just down the road is such a death trap.

really? Is it that dangerous, I've not heard of any major accidents there...

The only part of it I dislike is the cycle lane around the outside, dangerous for cyclists to stay in it, drivers pay no attention to it and I've nearly been squashed a couple of times by cars cutting in front of me to exit

Fratton Fred

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

really? Is it that dangerous, I've not heard of any major accidents there...

The only part of it I dislike is the cycle lane around the outside, dangerous for cyclists to stay in it, drivers pay no attention to it and I've nearly been squashed a couple of times by cars cutting in front of me to exit

No major accidents, which is a miracle.

The roundabout is too small, badly laid out and has too many exits. Most people seem to just close their eyes, foot their foot down and hope for the best.

Cookie_Monster

Fratton Fred wrote: »

No major accidents, which is a miracle.

The roundabout is too small, badly laid out and has too many exits. Most people seem to just close their eyes, foot their foot down and hope for the best.

I actually think we are talking about different ones, Avondale roundabout is the one I mean, always known it as Glenageary Rdb, whereas you're talking about the Noggin Rdb, right? (which is actually called Glenageary Rdb on google)

The Noggin one is so bad because people cannot use it properly, especially crossing the shops entrance. But there's little to be done to it to improve it, lights or a junction would be a ****ing disaster there.

patrickbrophy18

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

The only part of it I dislike is the cycle lane around the outside, dangerous for cyclists to stay in it, drivers pay no attention to it and I've nearly been squashed a couple of times by cars cutting in front of me to exit

I never really thought of it like that. The fact that a cycle lane is on the outside makes it easier for a collision when a car exits as they could collide in a crisscross fashion. Okay, I'll buy that. I suppose if the car and bicycle share the outer lane of the roundabout it does make it safer for both types of road users. I still don't get why they are making it safer for the low density pedestrian traffic given that there is already ample room for them. Nevertheless, I do think that the exit for Upper Glenageary Road is way too tight.

TheVoodoo

A car overturned on the Avondale roundabout at the weekend, it's mad that it's not even finished and there has already been several accidents at it.

Eever

Is it my imagination or does it seem to have been abandoned at this stage?

The work they were doing to the ramps on Avondale Road was to fix them as most of them were falling apart. When I first saw the work they were doing on the roundabout I presumed they'd just made up a silly project to inconvenience everyone because they had some extra money leftover in their budget that needs to be used up by the end of the year and I was raging as I was thinking if they have money it should be going into fixing the speed ramps so I'm delighted they've done that.

As for the roundabout, I didn't really get the point but if people are saying it's a safety measure for cyclists then fair enough. What I don't get though is why they didn't just widen the whole thing, what they seem to have done is add a small, dark brick ledge to the roundabout which I would say is quite hard to see properly in the dark, especially if you're used to having that space. I haven't seen them do any work to it in the last week though, and there's cones everywhere, making it quite difficult to get around. Maybe they're still working on it and I just haven't been there at those times so it looks a bit abandoned to me!

blossom180

Eever wrote: »

Is it my imagination or does it seem to have been abandoned at this stage?

The work they were doing to the ramps on Avondale Road was to fix them as most of them were falling apart. When I first saw the work they were doing on the roundabout I presumed they'd just made up a silly project to inconvenience everyone because they had some extra money leftover in their budget that needs to be used up by the end of the year and I was raging as I was thinking if they have money it should be going into fixing the speed ramps so I'm delighted they've done that.

As for the roundabout, I didn't really get the point but if people are saying it's a safety measure for cyclists then fair enough. What I don't get though is why they didn't just widen the whole thing, what they seem to have done is add a small, dark brick ledge to the roundabout which I would say is quite hard to see properly in the dark, especially if you're used to having that space. I haven't seen them do any work to it in the last week though, and there's cones everywhere, making it quite difficult to get around. Maybe they're still working on it and I just haven't been there at those times so it looks a bit abandoned to me!

They were working on it last Friday.

Lola92

They are still working on the roundabout by Killiney Towers. I was driving past there today and the place was a death trap with traffic cones everywhere and work vans parked on junctions. You could hardly tell where the exits actually were! Also they are using cobble lock around the roundabout! :eek: Completely unnecessary expense.

I agree with the new monkstown junction being fairly useless, if you are not familiar with the junction it can be very unclear. The recently developed TK roundabout also. They should have left the TK roundabout as it was with two lanes.

I think the pedestrian lights on Kill Avenue are a great development though. There are 4 primary schools very close by between the Holly park estate and Kill o'the grange. It was very difficult to cross the road safely there especially at rush hour and school times. A necessary and practical safety measure IMO!

Cookie_Monster

Lola92 wrote: »

Also they are using cobble lock around the roundabout! :eek: Completely unnecessary expense.

Sounds like their trying their best once again to cause cyclists to get hurt with stupid, dangerous road surfaces. :rolleyes:

patrickbrophy18

I thought I would resurrect this thread given that the bulk of the work done to the roundabout in question has been complete for roughly a month now. Anyway, here is my postmortem of it beginning with the biggest problem:

1. Junction Exits: Each exit has been significantly tightened resulting in a round about that is no longer suitable for vehicles such as articulated trucks. Additionally, the bus routes which traverse the roundabout are now struggling to fit into their exits. This holds true, particularly for the exits to Upper Glenageary Road and Avondale Road. In other words, the front of the bus is nearly touching the central median at these exits because they are hemmed in by the rubber barriers to their left.
2. Cycle Lane: The cycle lane on the outer ring of the roundabout still remains which is a problem as I believe that side by side travel is the root cause of collisions in the first place. Think about it, if you are a cyclists on the outer lane of a roundabout (be it for cars or cyclists or both) and a car on the inner lane wants to exit before you, a collision is possible as the car could cut across your path. On the other hand single file traversal removes this possibility.
3. Positioning Of Road Furniture: This is closely tied in with point 1 above. The installation of road furniture such as sign posts and rubber barriers coupled with the repositioning of overhead lights directly beside the road-space further hems the buses in. There are loads of places where they could have been otherwise placed without being on top of the motorist whilst remaining visible.
4. Tailbacks: A new problem has emerged as a result of these measures and that is tailbacks. These tailbacks are now frequently present regardless of the time of day. Tailbacks weren't really an issue with the old layout and only built up at rush hour. Essentially, the new layout has made traffic flow less efficient. This is a major flaw with road narrowing.
5. Capsule Shaped Medians: Quite simply, I don't understand how these are safer for pedestrians than the old triangular medians given that the standing space is now significantly lower.

While I do agree with making roads safer for cyclists, points 1-4 highlight major flaws with the work carried out in Killiney Towers. There are loads of other ways in which the roundabout could have been made safer for cyclists.

Speed ramps (zebra crossings) at each exit would have been a much better method than junction tightening which is the biggest flaw. A dip in the center would allow the cyclist to keep their momentum. As such, the exit is both smooth and slower.

monument

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Junction Exits: Each exit has been significantly tightened resulting in a round about that is no longer suitable for vehicles such as articulated trucks.

The roundabout is very much so designed with HGVs in mind -- in the middle of the roundabout there's an extra bit of surface HGVs can use if they need it.

You're again confusing DLR Co Co stopping HGVs from using some very much so residential roads with something to do with the roundabout. The route around is along the R119 and R118 -- this route is far more suitable that Avondale Road with all of it's speed bumps, houses facing out onto it and the school.

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

[*]Cycle Lane: The cycle lane on the outer ring of the roundabout still remains which is a problem as I believe that side by side travel is the root cause of collisions in the first place. Think about it, if you are a cyclists on the outer lane of a roundabout (be it for cars or cyclists or both) and a car on the inner lane wants to exit before you, a collision is possible as the car could cut across your path. On the other hand single file traversal removes this possibility.

"Single file" really does not removed the all or any dangers as given the roundabout has to be kept large enough for HGVs, that's more than enough room for other motorists to pass out cyclists and swing in on front of them.

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Capsule Shaped Medians: Quite simply, I don't understand how these are safer for pedestrians than the old triangular medians given that the standing space is now significantly lower.

Standing space does not have to be significantly larger because crossing the junction overall has been made much easier with the shorter distances and narrow angles for motorists.

patrickbrophy18

monument wrote: »

The roundabout is very much so designed with HGVs in mind -- in the middle of the roundabout there's an extra bit of surface HGVs can use if they need it.

Is it now?

Given that buses are already struggling at the exits, articulated trucks which are up to 4 meters longer will find it next to impossible to negotiate the new exit radii.

monument wrote: »

You're again confusing DLR Co Co stopping HGVs from using some very much so residential roads with something to do with the roundabout. The route around is along the R119 and R118 -- this route is far more suitable that Avondale Road with all of it's speed bumps, houses facing out onto it and the school.

The fact still remains that the old layout made it much more suitable for HGVs to use all exits. Ergo, the new layout is makes it next to impossible to negotiate the new exit radii and hence, is a downgrade.

Also, the roomy nature of Avondale Road is essentially what makes it a suitable route for HGVs. Speed ramps shouldn't be a problem to any vehicle if they are approached with caution. It doesn't matter about the size of the gun, it matters the power of the shot.

Green patches were also left at each side to anticipate the ultimate widening of the road to become a possible QBC.

I don't really see why houses facing onto the road is a problem as the speed ramps on Avondale Road restrict the speed. Additionally, visibility onto the road from these houses is perfectly fine.

I can't understand how a school should dictate what type of traffic goes up and down it's road. Bear in mind that two roads serve the school. These are Avondale Road and Ballinclea Road (the location of your favourite new junction;) which I might add, is more spacious than I previously thought and less ambiguous). That's about it.

monument wrote: »

"Single file" really does not removed the all or any dangers as given the roundabout has to be kept large enough for HGVs, that's more than enough room for other motorists to pass out cyclists and swing in on front of them.

Again, I beg to differ about it being kept large enough for HGVs as the tightened exit radii are barely suitable for double-Decker buses let alone articulated trucks which are up to 4 meters longer.

Single file (in theory) prevents swing outs by virtue of the fact that side by side traversal leaves cyclists on the edge of a roundabout prone to being swept off by cars exiting before them. Therefore, single file traversal and wide exit radii coupled with speed ramps at exits should be a better alternative. Look no further than the Stradbrook Roundabout. This approach would have made far more sense than the mess at Killiney Towers.

monument wrote: »

Standing space does not have to be significantly larger because crossing the junction overall has been made much easier with the shorter distances and narrow angles for motorists.

As for pedestrians, I frequently walked along this roundabout in the old layout and I didn't see any problem with using it. So, if it ain't broken, don't try fixing it.

monument

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Is it now?

Given that buses are already struggling at the exits, articulated trucks which are up to 4 meters longer will find it next to impossible to negotiate the new exit radii...

The fact still remains that the old layout made it much more suitable for HGVs to use all exits. Ergo, the new layout is makes it next to impossible to negotiate the new exit radii and hence, is a downgrade.

...Again, I beg to differ about it being kept large enough for HGVs as the tightened exit radii are barely suitable for double-Decker buses let alone articulated trucks which are up to 4 meters longer.

You can beg to differ all you like but there really does not seem to be any of the major problems you are claiming. There's much more to the world and to our roads and streets than HGVs and the line about it being "next to impossible" seems little more than hot air.

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Also, the roomy nature of Avondale Road is essentially what makes it a suitable route for HGVs. Speed ramps shouldn't be a problem to any vehicle if they are approached with caution. It doesn't matter about the size of the gun, it matters the power of the shot.

Green patches were also left at each side to anticipate the ultimate widening of the road to become a possible QBC.

I don't really see why houses facing onto the road is a problem as the speed ramps on Avondale Road restrict the speed. Additionally, visibility onto the road from these houses is perfectly fine.

I can't understand how a school should dictate what type of traffic goes up and down it's road. Bear in mind that two roads serve the school. These are Avondale Road and Ballinclea Road (the location of your favourite new junction;) which I might add, is more spacious than I previously thought and less ambiguous). That's about it.

Look, it's a traffic calmed road and there's an alternative route which is more suited to HGVs. It's as simple as that.

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

(the location of your favourite new junction;) which I might add, is more spacious than I previously thought and less ambiguous). That's about it.

It's not my "favourite new junction", I was just amazed by how anybody could get worked up about the junction.

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Single file (in theory) prevents swing outs by virtue of the fact that side by side traversal leaves cyclists on the edge of a roundabout prone to being swept of by cars exiting before them. Therefore, single file traversal and wide exit radii coupled with speed ramps at exits should be a better alternative. Look no further than the Stradbrook Roundabout. This approach would have made far more sense than the mess at Killiney Towers.

It's not what is now shown on Google Maps, is it? ...or I'll have a look at it next time...

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

As for pedestrians, I frequently walked along this roundabout in the old layout and I didn't see any problem with using it. So, if it ain't broken, don't try fixing it.

Some people don't see any problem with running across dual carriageways... Just because it was fine for you does not mean it is not an improvement for others!

patrickbrophy18

monument wrote: »

You can beg to differ all you like but there really does not seem to be any of the major problems you are claiming. There's much more to the world and to our roads and streets than HGVs and the line about it being "next to impossible" seems little more than hot air.

Than why invest the guts of a quarter of a million that was needlessly blown on this roundabout if there is more to the world than our roads?

My answer: Leave it the way it was. There was no problem their to begin with!

monument wrote: »

It's not what is now shown on Google Maps, is it? ...or I'll have a look at it next time...

It is quite different now to the way it was back then and is now only one lane in width.

monument wrote: »

Some people don't see any problem with running across dual carriageways... Just because it was fine for you does not mean it is not an improvement for others!

Here's the thing. I observe my surroundings before crossing the road to make sure it is safe to do so. Not a problem to me. It requires this little thing called patience.

Moreover, it is a lesson that most of us learn in play school i.e. "Look left and right before crossing the road". Is this too hard to obey?

Pedestrians who fail to do so are a nuisance. Yet, the infrastructure in question has been tailored to suit them.

Pedestrians and like minded cyclists can say that they are being marginalized all they like. And yes, motorists, bus operators and truck drivers will have higher priority over other road users because they are paying tax (road tax and motor tax) towards the general up keep of the road system. It isn't exactly value for money when it is wasted on downgrades to roundabouts like the one in question.

zszs

was just much easier before they started work, everyday i use that roundabout and i always get pissed off, life and everything else should be simple rrrrrrrrr:mad:

monument

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Than why invest the guts of a quarter of a million that was needlessly blown on this roundabout if there is more to the world than our roads?

My answer: Leave it the way it was. There was no problem their to begin with!

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man"

-- George Bernard Shaw

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

It is quite different now to the way it was back then and is now only one lane in width.

I'll have a look at it next time I'm that way.

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Here's the thing. I observe my surroundings before crossing the road to make sure it is safe to do so. Not a problem to me. It requires this little thing called patience.

Moreover, it is a lesson that most of us learn in play school i.e. "Look left and right before crossing the road". Is this too hard to obey?

Pedestrians who fail to do so are a nuisance. Yet, the infrastructure in question has been tailored to suit them.

Refer to the George Bernard Shaw quote above.

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Pedestrians and like minded cyclists can say that they are being marginalized all they like. And yes, motorists, bus operators and truck drivers will have higher priority over other road users because they are paying tax (road tax and motor tax) towards the general up keep of the road system. It isn't exactly value for money when it is wasted on downgrades to roundabouts like the one in question.

It was about time... There's no such thing road tax. There has not been for a long time.

If all drivers were paying their way, daily motoring commuters, taxi drivers, truck companies / drivers, and other professional drivers would be paying a far higher percentage of motor tax. Currently somebody parked up in their drive most days and not going anywhere or walking or cycling or taking the bus or the train is paying more than those who drive. Those parked up on the council's streets are paying even more again.

There's no link between motor tax and road upkeep (it goes into central funding) and there's even less of a link between motor tax and road usage!

Furthermore, it's national and local policy to encourage cycling. Given the rising price of oil, the state's carbon commitments, and cycling's ability to help with major health issues (cycling reduces the chances of heart disease, high blood pressure, obesity and the most common form of diabetes!).

patrickbrophy18

monument wrote: »

Furthermore, it's national and local policy to encourage cycling. Given the rising price of oil, the state's carbon commitments, and cycling's ability to help with major health issues (cycling reduces the chances of heart disease, high blood pressure, obesity and the most common form of diabetes!).

To begin with, I find that George Bernard Shaw quote quite amusing and almost Darwinian (erm..Bernard Shawnian...:D)

Anyway, I do appreciate this part of the comment as it is a greener mode of transport, economical and good for the ticker:). However, can we agree that buses and bicycles should both play a part in making greener travel methods?

If so, I think all main roads should ultimately have a cycle lane, a bus lane and a car lane. A width of 10 meters per direction should suffice: 2 meters for pedestrians, 2 meters for cyclists, 3.25 meters for buses/trucks and the remaining 2.75 for cars. If an intermediate area is architecturally sensitive (as is the case with much of Monkstown, Dun Laoghaire, Sandycove, Dalkey and Killiney), a one way system would suffice. The South of France has a phenomenal system in place whereby large sections of cycle tracks are completely separated from the road.

In the case of roundabouts, here are my recommendations:

• Wide entry and exit radii for all vehicles.
• Zebra crossing at entries and exits to restrict speed.
• Maybe lane sharing is going to far. However, where possible, have a completely separated outer orbital cycle roundabout located 5 meters radius out from the main roundabout with grass in between.
• Laser activated cycle traffic lights which halt traffic at junctions where cyclists may either continue at their exit or go straight on.

At the end of the day, I think that roads should be suitable for all modes of transport i.e. cycling, bus travel, etc..

It's all about reaching a balance but sadly, I don't believe that Killiney Towers Roundabout struck a balance as it's exits are way too tight to the extent that some of them are almost right-angled particularly, the one at Upper Glenageary Road. The rest of it is not all that bad actually and quite aesthetic too.:D